Locations that are subject to earthquakes require luminaires to be designed to meet certain seismic requirements, such as being able to move/sway to prevent damage and injury. Existing solutions for meeting the seismic requirement in luminaires, such as linear luminaires 100 that are rigid pendant mounted include providing a full swivel at the joint 108 between the ceiling 104 and the rigid pendant 106 and at the joint 102 between the luminaires 100 and the rigid pendant 106 as illustrated in FIG. 1. The full swivel at both ends of the rigid pendant 106 allows a full range motion along the long side (length) 112 and short side (width) 114 of the linear luminaires 100. That is, the linear luminaires 100 can both swing (along the length and width) and tilt. However, as illustrated in FIGS. 2-3, once the linear luminaires 100 are tilted from their default position where they are level, they may remain tilted and may not return back to their default position without application of an external force by a user or any other appropriate means. That is, while the full swivel at both ends of the rigid pendant 106 provides a full range of motion to the linear luminaires 100 to meet the seismic requirement, there is a propensity for the linear luminaires 100 to become and remain tilted or un-level, as illustrated in FIGS. 2-3, which may be undesirable.
Other existing solutions for meeting the seismic requirements in linear luminaires that are rigid pendant mounted include providing a full swivel at the joint between the ceiling and the rigid pendant while keeping the joint 402 between the luminaires 410 and the rigid pendant 406 fixed as illustrated in FIG. 4. While keeping the joint 402 between the luminaires 410 and the rigid pendant 406 fixed prevents the tilting of the linear luminaires 410, the fixed joint also limits the swing of the linear luminaires 100 along the length of the linear luminaires 100, thereby failing to meet the seismic requirements.
This background information is provided to reveal information believed to be of possible relevance to the present disclosure. No admission is necessarily intended, nor should it be construed, that any of the preceding information constitutes prior art against the present disclosure.